Karl Marx proposes a bleak and realistic understanding of
capitalist hegemony and its effects. He points out the existence of the owners
of the means of production (Bourgeoisie) and the workers (Proletariat). He
recognizes our cultural shift and psychological shift from our ends as products
of us to ends as capital. The separation of labor, the distancing of ourselves
from our material expression, makes our work hollow and unproductive. It is
wasted time and its meaningful properties come simply from our survival rather
than from a sense of self worth.
The guest that came to class
described an oddly analogous situation in her own work. She, an executive
producer, owns the means to produce shows. Not literally since the network
executives own the equipment, but in a metaphorical sense she has the power to
initiate production and choose her workers. The working conditions for her
workers are dismal, and in fact some are barely even working for survival. At
$75 a day, working 21-hours is as close to submitting one’s self to slavery as
it gets in America. It is true that she herself began there and worked her way
up. She followed the timeless trend of American bootstrap pulling, but is her
success and the success of others like her indicative of a system that rewards
its proletariats? Or is it, like Marx would want us to believe, another way in
which the bourgeoisie masks its profound ability to sit on the shoulders of the
proletariat in order to be carried as high up the mountain of prosperity anyone
can get without being put down? If only the workers that prove themselves to be
unwavering and limitlessly self-denying make it to the level of foreman,
doesn’t that point out that those are the workers the bourgeoisie can get the
most bang for their buck? Isn’t the job of an executive producer orders of
magnitude harder than picking up cigarette butts? Doesn’t it require huge
amounts of stress and time commitment? Truly, the executive producer is the
machine, the workers are the cogs. The machine has more responsibility for the
production, but what it produces is still entirely separate from it. Does an
executive producer for ANTM produce a model? Or a show? Or viewership? Or more
jobs? I would probably say no. The model is not produced since its materiality
never changed from when it wasn’t designated as model. The show is produced by
the network. The viewership is produced by the show. The jobs are produced by
the available cash. Truly, the higher up you are on the proletariat ladder, the
more weight you have to carry. The American Mindset is then simply a
competition to see who can carry the bourgeoisie higher up the mountain; who
can impose upon themselves a harsher condition of labor.
I think you have a good point. Although I can't say I'd rather clean toilets and never sleep over an intensively stressful executive position, it is certain that an executive producer holds more responsibility. I think your post is really relevant to something she said about how if anything goes wrong, it's her fault, and if it doesn't, then someone else above her gets credit. I guess what I'm wondering is if it isn't the people high up on the shows who are NOT alienated from their labor, then who is it? The network owners?
ReplyDelete